State v. Winingham
| Decision Date | 05 November 1894 |
| Citation | 27 S.W. 1107 |
| Parties | STATE v. WININGHAM. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Miller county; D. W. Shackleford, Judge.
John L. Winingham, was convicted of incest, and appeals. Affirmed.
L. N. Musser, for appellant. R. F. Walker, Atty. Gen., and Morton Jourdan, for the State.
At the September term, 1893, of the circuit court of Miller county, the defendant was indicted for incest with his niece, M. R. E. Johnson. He was duly arraigned at the March term, 1894, plea of not guilty entered, and was tried and convicted as charged, and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary, and has appealed to this court. Defendant has made no appearance in this court since filing the transcript, on the 26th of June last. There was abundant evidence of the guilt of the prisoner, but no good purpose could be subserved by spreading the evidence of his degradation at length in the registered decisions of this court. We find no error in the record proper, and will determine the grounds alleged in the motion for new trial, in the absence of a formal assignment of errors in this court.
1. The action of the circuit court in refusing a continuance was not preserved in the bill of exceptions, and hence cannot be considered. The attempt to supply the omission in the bill of exceptions by filing a supplemental bill after the adjournment of court, and after the time within which exceptions might be filed as permitted by the order of the court, is futile, and said supplemental bill must be ignored in the determination of this appeal. Williams v. Railway Co., 112 Mo. 485, 20 S. W. 631; Railway Co. v. Carlisle, 94 Mo. 169, 7 S. W. 102.
2. There was no error in the admission of the various letters of the defendant in evidence, merely because he omitted to subscribe his name to them. They were shown to be in his handwriting, and Miss Johnson, to whom they were directed, testified to the arrangement made with her by defendant, by which they were to be placed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Myers
...The mere fact that the defendant's name was not signed to either of the papers did not affect their admissibility. State v. Winningham, 124 Mo. 425, 27 S. W. 1107. 6. Another ground of error assigned by the defendant is that the court refused to grant a new trial for the reason that it beca......
-
State v. Belknap
...defendant, in regard to material issues in the case. State v. Myers, 198 Mo. loc. cit. 256 et seq., 94 S. W. 242; State v. Winningham, 124 Mo. loc. cit. 425, 27 S. W. 1107. & The motion for a new trial contains the following as an assignment of "(23) The court erred in allowing the jury to ......
- State v. Dickson
-
State v. Gray, 49006
...fact that the child may have been guilty of improper relations with Mr. Cross was no defense to the charge of incest. State v. Winingham, 124 Mo. 423, 27 S.W. 1107, 1108(3). Further, the evidence developed at the hearing on the motion did not show reasonable diligence on the part of defenda......